Quoting Benoit Grégoire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tuesday 12 December 2006 09:54, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> HOWEVER, I think there's another issue here.. When you're doing a
>> large import and you create new accounts as part of the import, if you
>> then cancel the import process these new accounts
On Tuesday 12 December 2006 09:54, Derek Atkins wrote:
> HOWEVER, I think there's another issue here.. When you're doing a
> large import and you create new accounts as part of the import, if you
> then cancel the import process these new accounts don't get backed
> out too.
That's probably not w
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 10:05:21AM -0500, Josh Sled wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 22:06 -0500, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> > Invoices basically reuse the engine objects. But SXs have:
> > struct TTInfo_s
> [...]
> > which look suspiciously like a Transaction, and
> >
> > struct TTSplitInfo_s
> [..
On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 22:06 -0500, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> Invoices basically reuse the engine objects. But SXs have:
> struct TTInfo_s
[...]
> which look suspiciously like a Transaction, and
>
> struct TTSplitInfo_s
[...]
> which looks suspiciously like a Split. And then the whole duplicated
Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chris Shoemaker schrieb:
I'm just saying SXs could use the real engine
objects, just like Invoices. The only difference is that the engine
has to learn that "real" SX transactions aren't _that_ real. :)
>>> Except Invoices don't
On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 09:47:10AM +0100, Christian Stimming wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Chris Shoemaker schrieb:
> >>> I'm just saying SXs could use the real engine
> >>> objects, just like Invoices. The only difference is that the engine
> >>> has to learn that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Shoemaker schrieb:
>>> I'm just saying SXs could use the real engine
>>> objects, just like Invoices. The only difference is that the engine
>>> has to learn that "real" SX transactions aren't _that_ real. :)
>>>
>> Except Invoices don't either,
